Dr. Sanford Miller, Interim Chair Dr. Jason Morris, Assessment Coordinator

1. Assessment ReportMathematics DepartmentSchool of Science and MathematicsThursday, October 17, 2013 Dr. Sanford Miller, Interim Chair Dr. Jason Morris, Assessment Coordinator

2. What was Assessed(Student Learning Outcomes) Mathematics Department SLOs: Upon successful completion of a baccalaureate degree in mathematics, the graduate will be able to: • Discuss the scope of mathematics as an intellectual discipline, including issues such as its history, problems, algorithms, and application. • Carry out the creative and explorative processes of mathematics, including conjecture, generalization, and the construction of mathematically rigorous and logically correct proofs. (Continued next slide)

3. What was Assessed(Student Learning Outcomes) Mathematics Department SLOs: Upon successful completion of a baccalaureate degree in mathematics, the graduate will be able to: • Use mathematics to model and analyze real world problems. • Utilize appropriate technologies to solve mathematical problems and to judge the reasonableness of results. (Assessed Spring 2013) (Continued next slide)

4. What was Assessed(Student Learning Outcomes) Mathematics Department SLOs: Upon successful completion of a baccalaureate degree in mathematics, the graduate will be able to: • Communicate mathematics effectively in oral and written formats. • Actively engage with mathematics beyond the classroom.

5. Assessment Methodology Students were assessed in three courses. Each included assignment featured extensive use of the Maple mathematical modeling software package. • MTH 201 (Calculus 1), two assignments • All students from one section were assessed (n=22)* • MTH 203 (Calculus 3), three assignments • All students were assessed (n=15)* • MTH 454/554 (Partial Diff. Eqns.), one assignment • All students were assessed (n=3)* *Includes only those students who submitted the assignment

6. Assessment Methodology(Continued) • Students’ mastery of the SLO was assessed using their raw scores on the indicated assignments. • With respect to expectations, the raw scores were categorized as follows: • 90-100 = exceeds • 80-89 = meets • 70-79= approaches • Under 70 = does not meet • The criterion of success was that at least 80% of students should “meet” or “exceed” expectations

7. Assessment Results

8. Lessons Learned • The assessments were based largely upon assignments that were given late in the Spring, leaving little time for meaningful discussion. • Improve this timing, particularly in the Spring semesters • It is difficult to draw conclusions from the collected data, in part because of a lack of uniformity across instructors and assignments • Perhaps collect not just data, but also some materials such as rubrics, assignment objectives, and sample student work. But which? • Perhaps design departmental assessment instruments? • A low number of students is problematic • Perhaps include only “core” courses, or make changes based upon enrollment

9. Action Plan/Data Driven Decision: • With respect to assessment program, we should make some changes to increase the quality and timing of the assessments, and therefore to increase the level of faculty involvement and ownership. • With respect to the assessed Student Learning Outcome, the results seem to a possible disconnect: students seem to be up to the task in MTH 201, but not later. Why? Investigate.

10. What resources were applied or are needed to close the loop • Nothing beyond the investment of faculty time. • Of course, this is in itself a significant investment of resources.